4 ms·

He's quite racist[0] and people won't tolerate his hate. It's for the best he got hellbanned, so the "saner" ones won't be tempted to get into a flame war with

He's quite racist[0] and people won't tolerate his hate. It's for the best he got hellbanned, so the "saner" ones won't be tempted to get into a flame war with him. [0]:http://i.imgur.com/IIMGYKE.png http://i.imgur.com/IIMGYKE.png (the last comment made me laugh)

sillysaurus2 13y ago
He's not necessarily racist. He's suffering from a mental illness. He believes god talks to him.
- tinco 13y ago
  Saying racist things makes you racist, wether you are mentally ill or not. It does mean we should judge him less for it. But it also means it might be a good decision to ban him so that he does not tarnish the community with too many flame threads.
  - tippytop 13y ago
    Then does not saying racist things automatically make you not-racist? Or is there other criteria we need to apply before hanging the label? For example, do they believe the words coming out of their own mouth? What about someone with Tourette's? I'm not trying to fall in a philosophical hole, but I believe that racism is a conscious choice at some level and mental illness is not.
    - lutusp 13y ago
      > Then does not saying racist things automatically make you not-racist? No, that doesn't work. A person not saying racist things might be a racist on his day off. The absence of racist speech cannot be used to declare a person not racist, because: 1. The person might harbor racist but unspoken thoughts. 2. We're all racists. Number (2) pretty much settles the issue. I emphasize that the fact that we're all racists doesn't mean we're all bigots, or that we're not ashamed of our racism and sincerely wish to be free of racism. > I believe that racism is a conscious choice at some level and mental illness is not. I've met people raised in the south before modern times, and for many of them, racism was not a conscious choice. I've often disagreed with federal intervention in local politics, but as to civil rights, I have to say that was one case where federal intervention was absolutely necessary and just: http://media.northjersey.com/images/0825t_shuttle2_50p.jpg http://media.northjersey.com/images/0825t_shuttle2_50p.jpg Also, mental illness can sometimes be a conscious choice as well. We can talk ourselves into a very unhealthy mental state -- or out of one. I'm talking only about the many kinds of mental illness that aren't biological in origin -- the kinds of mental illness that were voted into existence, and that make the DSM* noticeably bigger with each new revision. * More about the DSM controversy: http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/elements/2013/05/the-scientific-backlash-against-the-dsm.html http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/elements/2013/05/the-s... EDIT: I cannot believe someone downvoted this terrific reply. If I say so myself, it's first-rate, and it represents the height of irony that it was downvoted.
      - sillysaurus2 13y ago
        Also, mental illness can sometimes be a conscious choice as well. We can talk ourselves into a very unhealthy mental state -- or out of one. Lest anyone believe this, let me emphasize that this project's author is suffering from schizophrenia, and schizophrenia is a physical disease. Your brain physically deteriorates.
        lutusp 13y ago
        > Lest anyone believe this, let me emphasize that this project's author is suffering from schizophrenia That doesn't contradict the idea that many mental illnesses have no physical or biological connection, indeed many are inventions of psychologists for their own personal benefit, and were created by votes, not research. > and schizophrenia is a physical disease. Your brain physically deteriorates. Very true, which is why schizophrenia isn't a mental illness, it's physical illness with mental symptoms. This isn't remotely controversial.
        wbhart 13y ago
        According to wikipedia, it is associated with (doesn't imply causation) physical changes to the brain in 40-50% of cases. I'm not any kind of expert, just reading what I see there, but apart from small decreases in brain volume (not known whether this is preexistent or not), I don't see any mention of the brain "deteriorating". Indeed, it seems that around a quarter of sufferers recover completely, others may have long periods between relapse. It is also possible to suffer schizophrenia with a high intelligence quotient.
        lutusp 13y ago
        Yes, noted, and perfectly reasonable. All this will eventually be resolved by neuroscience, as it takes over from psychiatry and psychology, a process that has already begun. Neuroscience has a long way to go before it can offer what medicine offers for conventional diseases. But in the long term, it will make psychiatry and psychology look like astrology. http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/elements/2013/05/the-scientific-backlash-against-the-dsm.html http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/elements/2013/05/the-s...
  - mehmehshoe 13y ago
    So I guess a large majority of comedians are racist. That may hurt ticket sales.
  - derefr 13y ago
    Does this mean spambots that get trained on a corpus containing racism are racists? Can you be a racist without knowing what race is? (This tangent brought to you by "things I'd rather HN talk about than this topic")
  - crux 13y ago
    Saying racist things makes those things racist. Being mentally ill makes you mentally ill and—in this case—prone to saying racist things.
- Udo 13y ago
  And on top of that, he's still a racist (and a homophobe if memory serves). Some of his rants are also more than a bit violent and scary, I wouldn't want to be near him when he isn't heavily medicated. The tragedy with illnesses like this is that it becomes almost impossible to draw a line between the condition and the person's personality. I have showdead on all the time and I see him posting his garbage every day. Every day. He has no good days. Personally, I'm disappointed this is at #1 on the front page, cool project or not.
  - sillysaurus2 13y ago
    You're disappointed that a cool project is #1 on hacker news?
    - Udo 13y ago
      Willful misunderstanding is of course always an option, I guess.
      - sillysaurus2 13y ago
        I was consciously trying not to misunderstand you. I can't parse what you said in any way except "this guy is a nutcase and should be denied praise since he's ill." I mean, how would you want to be treated if your genes were a little less signal and a little more noise?
        Udo 13y ago
        Your two posts where you are re-stating my opinion in your own words should qualify as a strawman-like attack, so willful misunderstanding is a fair charge. This kind of illness bleeds into a person's personality. Mental illness is a complex spectrum, not a boolean value. The more a person's capacity for reasoning about the world is compromised, the less relevant it becomes what that person wants. Clearly, if losethos would get what he wants, we'd all die a horrible death. Let that sink in for a second. So to answer your point: if I was a thoroughly crazy person, what I want would be irrelevant. Of course, all of these points and counterpoints between us are somewhat dancing around the actual issue. So I'll come out and say it: I don't like that dude. For me personally his views outweigh the programming things he does. Your opinion differs. You write off what you don't like as noise, and cherry-pick the things you like for praise. Both viewpoints have certain merits. However, when you summarize my point of view as > You're disappointed that a cool project is #1 on hacker news? you crossed the line into outright misrepresentation by using a polemic sound bite designed to distort the meaning behind the original argument. Yes, I personally am disappointed this is #1 on HN. Yes, it's a cool project. However, it should also be exceedingly obvious that I'm not disappointed because a cool project is featured prominently. And you did the same thing again with > "this guy is a nutcase and should be denied praise since he's ill." Yes, that guy is a "nutcase". And yes, he should be denied praise. But once again you imply a causal link between those statements where you know is none: I don't want to deny praise because he's ill. I want to deny praise because he's an asshole. You did this maneuver two times. There is little reason to doubt you're trying to ridicule my argument by faultily restating it. But let's put your rhetorics aside. This all is based on my personal opinion about losethos. You have a different one, and at the time of writing this, it is shared by at least 139 people. Be happy about that. It means you're probably right.
- dsego 13y ago
  Just like Jesus?

sillysaurus2 13y ago

He's not necessarily racist. He's suffering from a mental illness. He believes god talks to him.

tinco 13y ago
Saying racist things makes you racist, wether you are mentally ill or not. It does mean we should judge him less for it. But it also means it might be a good decision to ban him so that he does not tarnish the community with too many flame threads.
- tippytop 13y ago
  Then does not saying racist things automatically make you not-racist? Or is there other criteria we need to apply before hanging the label? For example, do they believe the words coming out of their own mouth? What about someone with Tourette's? I'm not trying to fall in a philosophical hole, but I believe that racism is a conscious choice at some level and mental illness is not.
  - lutusp 13y ago
    > Then does not saying racist things automatically make you not-racist? No, that doesn't work. A person not saying racist things might be a racist on his day off. The absence of racist speech cannot be used to declare a person not racist, because: 1. The person might harbor racist but unspoken thoughts. 2. We're all racists. Number (2) pretty much settles the issue. I emphasize that the fact that we're all racists doesn't mean we're all bigots, or that we're not ashamed of our racism and sincerely wish to be free of racism. > I believe that racism is a conscious choice at some level and mental illness is not. I've met people raised in the south before modern times, and for many of them, racism was not a conscious choice. I've often disagreed with federal intervention in local politics, but as to civil rights, I have to say that was one case where federal intervention was absolutely necessary and just: http://media.northjersey.com/images/0825t_shuttle2_50p.jpg http://media.northjersey.com/images/0825t_shuttle2_50p.jpg Also, mental illness can sometimes be a conscious choice as well. We can talk ourselves into a very unhealthy mental state -- or out of one. I'm talking only about the many kinds of mental illness that aren't biological in origin -- the kinds of mental illness that were voted into existence, and that make the DSM* noticeably bigger with each new revision. * More about the DSM controversy: http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/elements/2013/05/the-scientific-backlash-against-the-dsm.html http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/elements/2013/05/the-s... EDIT: I cannot believe someone downvoted this terrific reply. If I say so myself, it's first-rate, and it represents the height of irony that it was downvoted.
    - sillysaurus2 13y ago
      Also, mental illness can sometimes be a conscious choice as well. We can talk ourselves into a very unhealthy mental state -- or out of one. Lest anyone believe this, let me emphasize that this project's author is suffering from schizophrenia, and schizophrenia is a physical disease. Your brain physically deteriorates.
      - lutusp 13y ago
        > Lest anyone believe this, let me emphasize that this project's author is suffering from schizophrenia That doesn't contradict the idea that many mental illnesses have no physical or biological connection, indeed many are inventions of psychologists for their own personal benefit, and were created by votes, not research. > and schizophrenia is a physical disease. Your brain physically deteriorates. Very true, which is why schizophrenia isn't a mental illness, it's physical illness with mental symptoms. This isn't remotely controversial.
        wbhart 13y ago
        According to wikipedia, it is associated with (doesn't imply causation) physical changes to the brain in 40-50% of cases. I'm not any kind of expert, just reading what I see there, but apart from small decreases in brain volume (not known whether this is preexistent or not), I don't see any mention of the brain "deteriorating". Indeed, it seems that around a quarter of sufferers recover completely, others may have long periods between relapse. It is also possible to suffer schizophrenia with a high intelligence quotient.
        lutusp 13y ago
        Yes, noted, and perfectly reasonable. All this will eventually be resolved by neuroscience, as it takes over from psychiatry and psychology, a process that has already begun. Neuroscience has a long way to go before it can offer what medicine offers for conventional diseases. But in the long term, it will make psychiatry and psychology look like astrology. http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/elements/2013/05/the-scientific-backlash-against-the-dsm.html http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/elements/2013/05/the-s...
- mehmehshoe 13y ago
  So I guess a large majority of comedians are racist. That may hurt ticket sales.
- derefr 13y ago
  Does this mean spambots that get trained on a corpus containing racism are racists? Can you be a racist without knowing what race is? (This tangent brought to you by "things I'd rather HN talk about than this topic")
- crux 13y ago
  Saying racist things makes those things racist. Being mentally ill makes you mentally ill and—in this case—prone to saying racist things.
Udo 13y ago
And on top of that, he's still a racist (and a homophobe if memory serves). Some of his rants are also more than a bit violent and scary, I wouldn't want to be near him when he isn't heavily medicated. The tragedy with illnesses like this is that it becomes almost impossible to draw a line between the condition and the person's personality. I have showdead on all the time and I see him posting his garbage every day. Every day. He has no good days. Personally, I'm disappointed this is at #1 on the front page, cool project or not.
- sillysaurus2 13y ago
  You're disappointed that a cool project is #1 on hacker news?
  - Udo 13y ago
    Willful misunderstanding is of course always an option, I guess.
    - sillysaurus2 13y ago
      I was consciously trying not to misunderstand you. I can't parse what you said in any way except "this guy is a nutcase and should be denied praise since he's ill." I mean, how would you want to be treated if your genes were a little less signal and a little more noise?
      - Udo 13y ago
        Your two posts where you are re-stating my opinion in your own words should qualify as a strawman-like attack, so willful misunderstanding is a fair charge. This kind of illness bleeds into a person's personality. Mental illness is a complex spectrum, not a boolean value. The more a person's capacity for reasoning about the world is compromised, the less relevant it becomes what that person wants. Clearly, if losethos would get what he wants, we'd all die a horrible death. Let that sink in for a second. So to answer your point: if I was a thoroughly crazy person, what I want would be irrelevant. Of course, all of these points and counterpoints between us are somewhat dancing around the actual issue. So I'll come out and say it: I don't like that dude. For me personally his views outweigh the programming things he does. Your opinion differs. You write off what you don't like as noise, and cherry-pick the things you like for praise. Both viewpoints have certain merits. However, when you summarize my point of view as > You're disappointed that a cool project is #1 on hacker news? you crossed the line into outright misrepresentation by using a polemic sound bite designed to distort the meaning behind the original argument. Yes, I personally am disappointed this is #1 on HN. Yes, it's a cool project. However, it should also be exceedingly obvious that I'm not disappointed because a cool project is featured prominently. And you did the same thing again with > "this guy is a nutcase and should be denied praise since he's ill." Yes, that guy is a "nutcase". And yes, he should be denied praise. But once again you imply a causal link between those statements where you know is none: I don't want to deny praise because he's ill. I want to deny praise because he's an asshole. You did this maneuver two times. There is little reason to doubt you're trying to ridicule my argument by faultily restating it. But let's put your rhetorics aside. This all is based on my personal opinion about losethos. You have a different one, and at the time of writing this, it is shared by at least 139 people. Be happy about that. It means you're probably right.
dsego 13y ago
Just like Jesus?